This approach would work and would provide failover. It wouldn't handle the load balancing, but it would be very fast to roll out. If used one or two build machines, I think I'd take this approach. Round robin would be good enough to keep both machines busy.
________________________________ From: Rick Mangi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 2/23/2005 5:07 PM To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: Clustered Maven? Jared, Didn't think you were being dismissive at all. > Our existing solution has a cluster of build machines that provide > very nice failover, so the feature is "expected". Suggesting we look > at a build system with a dozen boxes, with each one being a point of > failure, wouldn't go over well. Given cascading build failure issues, > the wrong box dying could take out (literally) hundreds of builds. > I would approach this the same way I approach a web server farm. Primary/Secondary. The odds of a build machine blowing up are pretty low. Just assign each build a secondary failover and if you can't ping the machine, send the job to the secondary machine. A more robust environment would run some sanity check on the box before assigning the build task. Rick --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
